ztna_identity_providers

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read, so the description's main job is to add context — but it adds none. It says nothing about pagination behavior (a default limit of 100 implies paging), what happens when the limit is exceeded, or whether results are sorted in any way.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler — appropriate in size. Its brevity, however, reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

A read-only listing tool with no output schema and two optional, undocumented parameters should at minimum explain the local-versus-remote provider distinction and paging. With annotations covering safety, the remaining gaps are still substantial for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% for both parameters, so the description must carry their meaning, and it does not. Neither the purpose of "limit" (page size?) nor the distinction between "include_local" true/false is explained anywhere an agent can see.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"[READ] List configured identity providers" states a specific verb (List) and resource (identity providers), and the read-only tag reinforces it. It is clearly distinct from the sibling tools, none of which deal with identity providers, though the description does not explicitly say so.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives, whether it is the only identity-provider endpoint, or whether it is a full listing versus a paged one. The word "List" implies discovery use, but nothing addresses preconditions or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.